Safe Mode: On
Estimated 12,000 surround White House to protest Keystone XL pipeline

On the 6th of November, an estimated 12,000 people surrounded the White House, all the way around and at least three deep, demanding that President Obama deny the permit for the Keystone XL tar sands oil pipeline to cross the US-Canadian border.
Organizers had printed 4,000 orange stop the pipeline vests, but there were so many protesters the majority did not have them because supplies ran out!

This is the same Keystone XL pipeline that over 1,200 people were arrested in front of the White House from August 20 to September 3 in earlier protests against. Obama has now promised to make the decision on the permit, a State Department function, himself. Environmental activists are warning Obama to refuse the pipeline's permit, or risk losing the 2012 election as dismayed environmentalists stay home in droves.

Only twice since the April 16, 2000 IMF protests has the White House been fully surrounded by protesters. Once was an ANSWER rally years ago in the early days of the Iraq war, the other was today's protest against the Keystone XL pipeline.

background

The Alberta tar sands contain so much oil they've been called "a second Saudi Arabia."The only thing is, the bitumen in the tar sands is not all the way to being oil, and the current extraction processes use up to 80% of the oil's energy value just in getting it out of the ground. Already 40% of all natural gas consumption in Alberta is to feed existing tar sands oil refining-and that's without the pipeline!

Native American communities whose land is being destroyed by the destructive mining processes used to extract this oil were the first to speak out against the Keystone XL pipeline, and caught the attention of climate scientists. These scientists have concluded that if all the oil in the tar sands is burned, it's "game over" for stopping catastrophic climate change!

Loading the player ...
Embed CodeSwitch Player
Plays: 1852 (Embed: 0)

Added: Nov-6-2011 Occurred On: Nov-6-2011
By: dcdirectactionnews
In:
Other News
Tags: Keystone XL, Alberta Tar Sands, Climate Change, Stop the Pipeline
Location: Washington, District of Columbia, United States (load item map)
Views: 2462 | Comments: 41 | Votes: 0 | Favorites: 0 | Shared: 125 | Updates: 0 | Times used in channels: 2
You need to be registered in order to add comments! Register HERE
Sort by: Newest first | Oldest first | Highest score first
Liveleak opposes racial slurs - if you do spot comments that fall into this category, please report them for us to review.
  • Drill Baby Drill!

    Posted Nov-6-2011 By 

    (6) | Report

  • Occupy Wall Street hippies, this is how you protest. If you take up public place, don't block the sidewalks or streets, don't stand in front of cars and don't put up your tents all over the place.

    Posted Nov-6-2011 By 

    (6) | Report

    • @erzhik You protest and carry out direct action any way to have to to get the job done-every tool in the toolbox and no limits! Limits are for games, not for all-out warfare against corporate criminals as ruthless as any empire in the history of the planet.

      The attempts to convince Obama to unilaterally veto the pipeline require use of a tool that will not offend him. If it is necessary for Native Americans and others harmed by the pipeline to stop it in the field, that will require entirely di More..

      Posted Nov-6-2011 By 

      (-9) | Report

    • Comment of user 'shadedwhite' has been deleted by author (after account deletion)!
    • @shadedwhite When where they go and what they do will change the climate and flood out my sister's home 3 feet above sea level, their right to swing their arms is hitting my nose and I have the right to block that swing. I have family in the line of fire on this, so don't talk about standing to take action

      Posted Nov-10-2011 By 

      (0) | Report

  • They had all best walked or rode bikes to the event.

    Posted Nov-6-2011 By 

    (3) | Report

    • Comment of user 'ReplicantDeckard' has been deleted by author (after account deletion)!
    • @zindo I rode mine, can't speak for anyone else...

      Posted Nov-6-2011 By 

      (-6) | Report

    • @ReplicantDeckard The amount of oil needed to make a lifetime of grease, tires and parts for a bike would not drive your SUV from here to Baltimore. Oil, like so many problems, is a matter of TOO MUCH, in this case WAY TOO MUCH of something!

      Posted Nov-6-2011 By 

      (-6) | Report

    • @dcdirectactionnews

      Ehhhhh! Wrong. Every component on a bike takes some sort of fossil fuel to make, from the frame to the tires.

      Posted Nov-6-2011 By 

      (6) | Report

    • Comment of user 'shadedwhite' has been deleted by author (after account deletion)!
  • The 2012 prediction doesnt look too far off so far, this world is slowly falling apart. I hope we dont get involve in another war.

    Posted Nov-6-2011 By 

    (2) | Report

  • Don't you mean 1200

    Posted Nov-6-2011 By 

    (1) | Report

    • Comment of user 'shadedwhite' has been deleted by author (after account deletion)!
  • "the current extraction processes use up to 80% of the oil's energy value just in getting it out of the ground. Already 40% of all natural gas consumption in Alberta is to feed existing tar sands oil refining-and that's without the pipeline!"

    If the process wasn't economically viable, the tar sands wouldn't operate. Easy as that.

    Posted Nov-6-2011 By 

    (1) | Report

    • Comment of user 'shadedwhite' has been deleted by author (after account deletion)!
    • @shadedwhite

      I understand that industry won't produce something that isn't economically viable, therefore I should relocate to the US, get a VISA before 2012 and run for president?

      I'm failing to follow your logic.

      You don't have to be particularly smart to realize that selling something you lose money on is a bad idea.

      Posted Nov-6-2011 By 

      (1) | Report

  • natural gas is a godsend, i read in the nytimes recently that from 2003 where it was maybe 1 percent of our gas production, it has now skyrocketed to 30 percent in little over 8 years, and it's just the start, when this pipeline finishes we will have almost near energy independence, the geo-political ramifications for this are huge, we can tell the arabs to eat shit, most especially the saudis, the price of crude oil will go down, and it will give us a big window in which we can develop alternat More..

    Posted Nov-6-2011 By 

    (1) | Report

    • @golem

      that is of course if the funny talking canadians don't decide to blacmail us in the future and force us to invade their country, i can see a situation like artic sovereignty becoming a thorny issue in the future, but that's a talk for another day

      Posted Nov-6-2011 By 

      (-1) | Report

    • @golem
      Canadians blackmailing America? Are you for real? US has been buddies with them forever and I seriously doubt Canada would ever blackmail the US and America would ever attack Canada over anything.

      Posted Nov-6-2011 By 

      (0) | Report

    • @John_Matrix

      The USA couldn't afford to attack Canada anyway. The whole British commonwealth would rain down hellfire.

      Posted Nov-6-2011 By 

      (0) | Report

    • @golem FRACKING is a dirty way to get at the gas. Not only does the gas bearing rock get fracked, so so aquifers crossing the wellbore at shallower depths. There have been a lot of problems with contaminated aquifers and drinking water as a result.

      Shit-we need to start harvesting the methane we allow to escape from sewage treatment plants, and so long as oil is drilled we need to STOP flaring off gas and start using that gas, possibly by placing gas pipelines along existing oil pipelines. This More..

      Posted Nov-6-2011 By 

      (-3) | Report

    • @jum_runky

      eh im pretty sure they could, and who's the commonwealth?, the UK?, would never do it, australia? doubt it, like i said it's a hypothetical situation i'm throwing out there, doesn't mean it's gonna happen

      Posted Nov-7-2011 By 

      (0) | Report

  • fuck man these people are stupid but necessary. do they realize that their signs, there shoes, their clothes, how they got there, are all because of oil, and if we don't develop what we have than the price of oil will skyrocket and then they wont be able to protest because they will be too busy trying to get something to eat in soup kitchen line ups. having said that these protests are necessary because these oil companies need to make sure it is done in a environmental way as much as possible. More..

    Posted Nov-7-2011 By 

    (0) | Report

    • @rmacl Of course they realize that. That doesn't mean that they can't see the immediate problem in the contamination of 20% of our countries irrigation water. The Ogallala Aquifer is not something we should contaminate if we want to eat.

      Posted Nov-7-2011 By 

      (0) | Report

    • @rmacl If the price of oil goes up, you will see fewer people wasting it driving gas-guzzling SUV's and the price will go back down again, just like it did when the Great Recession began and demand dropped like a stone

      Posted Nov-8-2011 By 

      (-1) | Report

  • Comment of user '1098r' has been deleted by author (after account deletion)!
    • @1098r Unfortunately, The oil will go to China:
      National Geographic: "refineries on the Gulf Coast have long-term commitments to buy oil from current suppliers—including Saudi Arabia, Venezuela, and Mexico. Those nations don't want to cede market share to Canada. All three have ownership in Texas refineries, and they can also match any discount that comes with the Canadian crude."

      Even if America does build the pipeline, the oil will go to China, "who want to use Canadian oil More..

      Posted Nov-7-2011 By 

      (0) | Report